Considering Taking a Garage to Small Claims Court

[Nuluvius]

My car developed an air bag fault as well as a hole in its radiator (not related). I took it to a garage who replaced the radiator and attempted to repair the air bag fault. They informed me that they had replaced an air bag sensor but that the fault had persisted. Their advice was to take the car to the dealership to have this sensor ‘programmed’.

They also neglected to connect the radiator cooling fan and thus the car boiled in heavy traffic. Fortunately it was switched off quickly enough that no permanent damage seems to have been caused. When informing them of this and even presenting them with a written AA report, they categorically stated that it couldn’t have been their fault and even said that I wouldn’t be able to prove that it was them anyway (not that I ever suggested or eluded to taking any action over it - they were just very quick to go on the defensive).

In any event, under their advice I paid for a time slot at the dealership but when I arrived they informed me that there was nothing to ‘program’ on this type of car and that the best that they could do was perform a diagnostic (as I’d already paid for the slot at this point). The diagnostic pointed to an issue with the wiring from the sensor that the garage had apparently replaced.

I relayed this information back to the them and they replied by telling me to go somewhere else and that they were unable to fix it.

I took the car to another garage who diagnosed the fault as the sensor that they had apparently replaced. Upon changing it the fault went away and has not returned since…

I have two invoices, one from the original garage showing the sensor that they replaced and a second, from the recent garage showing the same sensor replacement work. I also have a dealership diagnostic pointing to a fault with the wiring from this sensor and an AA report showing speculative negligence (no damage seems to have been done as a result of the fan connector and there’s no way to categorically prove that they did not connect it).

I have approached the original garage with these facts and outlined to them that I feel that they did not carry out the work with reasonable skill and care reference the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I also requested reimbursement for the sensor replacement that they carried out, the dealership diagnostic (which was undertaken at their expert advice) as well as the cost of replacing the sensor for the second time.

They have responded by claiming that they replaced a different sensor that also shares the same fault code. They are also claiming that they spoke to the dealership and that it was actually their advice to bring the car in to be ‘programmed’ that they were passing on to me. They have concluded by saying that there will be no refund as ‘they cannot be held accountable for the dealerships work’ and that we should instead seek recourse from them.

I am now of the opinion that they had possibly taken on more than they had the skill/capability to handle with this job...

My question therefore is what should I do now; should I take them to small claims court or should I cut my losses (which were close to £1k) and move on with life?

Your advice would be greatly appreciated.

[Phaeton]

des8 Any advice?

[des8]

Forget about the fan.. no damage and will be a red herring.

What I do find odd is that the first garage replaced a sensor which did not cure the fault.
They should therefore have put the original sensor back and sent you over to the experts OR if (repeat if) the fault code could relate to another sensor they should have replaced that sensor..
If the fault code indicated sensors they should have known and checked other sensors on finding the first replacement did not cure the problem.

Are you sure the second garage replaced the same sensor?
If so the first replacement was probably faulty

Either way they did not perform with reasonable skill and care, and IMO should refund their charge.
I doubt you would be successful recovering costs for the work done by the dealership

IMO any decent garage would not have charged for replacing a sensor which did not cure the problem.
Certainly worth sending them a letter before claim

[Nuluvius]

Thank you for your advice, it's much appreciated

Forget about the fan.. no damage and will be a red herring.

Indeed, I only mentioned it as context - and was wondering about including it as such in any legal proceedings. Or would you be inclined to class it as superfluous?

Are you sure the second garage replaced the same sensor?

What I do know is that I have two invoices that say the same sensor (NSF).

So no I don't know for a fact that if what the first garage says is true, that there are multiple sensors identified as the same thing, who replaced which sensor.

When asked to clarify what sensor they replaced (prior to requesting reimbursement), the first garage said that it was (the) NSF crash sensor. After sending my request for reimbursement, they have changed their story to saying that it was some kind of side sensor that was also identified as the NSF sensor and that there was another one on the front that also showed a fault, also identified as the NSF.

I doubt you would be successful recovering costs for the work done by the dealership

Yes I agree and would be inclined to imagine that the original garage should refund that since I was acting under their "expert advice".

[jaguarsuk]

Forget about the fan.. no damage and will be a red herring.

If there was additional cost of obtaining the AA's report then this should be claimed, had they conducted their work diligently you would not have needed the AA report.

If it's part of your membership and no additional cost, then it's not relevant.

Could you have cancelled the appointment at the dealership to get your money back when they told you that nothing on your car is programmable?

If you could then you can't claim anything for that appointment. If not then I would claim for the cost of that appointment as it was booked on the advice of the first garage. You couldn't claim for the subsequent work done by the dealer though, otherwise it'd be like getting a free job done.

[Nuluvius]

If there was additional cost of obtaining the AA's report then this should be claimed, had they conducted their work diligently you would not have needed the AA report.

If it's part of your membership and no additional cost, then it's not relevant.

It was free under membership. As I mentioned however, I only included this to set the context (i.e. the ineptitude of the garage). I would be interested in opinions of whether I should include it as part of any legal proceedings or whether it would just be superfluous information.

Could you have cancelled the appointment at the dealership to get your money back when they told you that nothing on your car is programmable?

No they only told me that there was nothing to do once I'd paid and arrived with the car - I did make every effort to find out over the phone when enquiring/relaying the garage's advice to them. The diagnostic they performed was to try to make some kind of use of the time window I had purchased - as there was no refund offered.

[jaguarsuk]

It was free under membership. As I mentioned however, I only included this to set the context (i.e. the ineptitude of the garage). I would be interested in opinions of whether I should include it as part of any legal proceedings or whether it would just be superfluous information.



No they only told me that there was nothing to do once I'd paid and arrived with the car - I did make every effort to find out over the phone when enquiring/relaying the garage's advice to them. The diagnostic they performed was to try to make some kind of use of the time window I had purchased - as there was no refund offered.

It would be useful background information when you composed a witness statement, but not in the initial Particulars of Claim.

The problem is that you had some benefit of the appointment and had you not had that appointment you would have gone somewhere else, then paid them to fix the car. It's likely that it would be seen as the process of affecting the repair and not recoverable.

Certainly what you paid for the sensor to be replaced by the first garage would be, the fact they claimed they had done one bit or work and then when asked for a refund changing their story certainly doesn't help them. It might be worth having a word with the dealership to ask if they'd advise on what the garages excuse is and perhaps provide you with their professional assessment seen as the garage is suggesting you claim from them.

In the mean time a letter before action seems the most appropriate course as suggested by Des above

[des8]

Can you post up details of make, model and year.
I'll do some digging to try and find out how many Near Side Front sensors this car might have!

[Nuluvius]

The problem is that you had some benefit of the appointment and had you not had that appointment you would have gone somewhere else, then paid them to fix the car. It's likely that it would be seen as the process of affecting the repair and not recoverable.

There was absolutely no benefit to the work that the dealership carried out. They were even starting to go in the wrong direction anyway as they wanted to remove the whole dashboard to examine the wiring from the sensor to the air bag module.

When the second garage took the work on they even said that any auto electrician would have had to have begun the fault finding exploration again anyway - disregarding the diagnostic that the dealership had carried out. Indeed they found the sensor to be faulty right way...

It might be worth having a word with the dealership to ask if they'd advise on what the garages excuse is and perhaps provide you with their professional assessment seen as the garage is suggesting you claim from them.

That is interesting I may just do that!

Can you post up details of make, model and year.
I'll do some digging to try and find out how many Near Side Front sensors this car might have!

Thank you It is a Kia Sportage 2005 2.0Ltr.

I have also requested the specific details of the sensor replacement from the second garage.

[jaguarsuk]

There was absolutely no benefit to the work that the dealership carried out. They were even starting to go in the wrong direction anyway as they wanted to remove the whole dashboard to examine the wiring from the sensor to the air bag module.

When the second garage took the work on they even said that any auto electrician would have had to have begun the fault finding exploration again anyway - disregarding the diagnostic that the dealership had carried out. Indeed they found the sensor to be faulty right way...


That is interesting I may just do that!


Thank you It is a Kia Sportage 2005 2.0Ltr.

Apologies I was under the impression the second garage was the dealership.

I should have stuck to your terminology to be clear.

I'm not disputing you claim for the work of the first garage (dealership) if they didn't do the job they were supposed, e.g. replace the NSF sensor to correct the fault. And upon failing to correct the fault replace the sensor they are now saying they replaced.

My point is that a Judge might view the diagnostic the second garage did as being necessary to affect the repair, in that the second garage suggested carrying it out and then this lead to the fault being properly rectified. Even if not necessary you had some sort of service for your money and it could be ruled you got what you paid for with the first garage not being liable.

Had you left on finding the appointment being useless then you'd certainly have a strong claim as you got nothing for your money after being wrongly advised to book an appointment.

I'm not trying to be against you, just to put forward potentially what might be said against your claim.

[des8]

As expected there is only one front sensor each side (numbered 8 each side).
NSF will only refer to one sensor!


SRS components and functions The SRS consists of the followingcomponents: 1. Driver's front air bag module 2. Passenger's front air bag module 3. Side air bag modules* 4. Curtain air bag modules* 5. Retractor pre-tensioner assemblies 6. Air bag warning light 7. SRS control module (SRSCM) 8. Front impact sensors 9. Side impact sensors* 10. PASSENGER AIR BAG “OFF” indicator (Front passenger’s seat only) 11. Occupant classification system (Front passenger’s seat only) 12. Driver’s seat track position sensor 13. Driver’s and front passenger’s seat belt buckle sensors *: if equipped

[Nuluvius]

As expected there is only one front sensor each side (numbered 8 each side).
NSF will only refer to one sensor!


SRS components and functions The SRS consists of the followingcomponents: 1. Driver's front air bag module 2. Passenger's front air bag module 3. Side air bag modules* 4. Curtain air bag modules* 5. Retractor pre-tensioner assemblies 6. Air bag warning light 7. SRS control module (SRSCM) 8. Front impact sensors 9. Side impact sensors* 10. PASSENGER AIR BAG “OFF” indicator (Front passenger’s seat only) 11. Occupant classification system (Front passenger’s seat only) 12. Driver’s seat track position sensor 13. Driver’s and front passenger’s seat belt buckle sensors *: if equipped

Wow, ok that is interesting to see! Would you have a source for that which you could link me?

[jaguarsuk]

As expected there is only one front sensor each side (numbered 8 each side).
NSF will only refer to one sensor!


SRS components and functions The SRS consists of the followingcomponents: 1. Driver's front air bag module 2. Passenger's front air bag module 3. Side air bag modules* 4. Curtain air bag modules* 5. Retractor pre-tensioner assemblies 6. Air bag warning light 7. SRS control module (SRSCM) 8. Front impact sensors 9. Side impact sensors* 10. PASSENGER AIR BAG “OFF” indicator (Front passenger’s seat only) 11. Occupant classification system (Front passenger’s seat only) 12. Driver’s seat track position sensor 13. Driver’s and front passenger’s seat belt buckle sensors *: if equipped

Definitely time to draft that letter before action. Once you have typed it if you want to copy and paste it here (with personal information removed) we can help finalise it for you.

[des8]

Wow, ok that is interesting to see! Would you have a source for that which you could link me?

I'll have to go hunting again!!

Here http://www.c-suvs.com/airbags_advanc...tem-2444.html:

[Nuluvius]

Apologies I was under the impression the second garage was the dealership.

I should have stuck to your terminology to be clear.

I'm not disputing you claim for the work of the first garage (dealership) if they didn't do the job they were supposed, e.g. replace the NSF sensor to correct the fault. And upon failing to correct the fault replace the sensor they are now saying they replaced.

My point is that a Judge might view the diagnostic the second garage did as being necessary to affect the repair, in that the second garage suggested carrying it out and then this lead to the fault being properly rectified. Even if not necessary you had some sort of service for your money and it could be ruled you got what you paid for with the first garage not being liable.

Had you left on finding the appointment being useless then you'd certainly have a strong claim as you got nothing for your money after being wrongly advised to book an appointment.

I'm not trying to be against you, just to put forward potentially what might be said against your claim.

Just to further clarify, there were three entities involved: Garage #1 who started the work, a dealership (on instruction from garage #1) who, despite being given wrong information (from garage #1), did their best to help (but who's work was of no use/had no effect on the outcome) and garage #2 who fixed the problem properly.

I have considered your earlier suggestion:

It might be worth having a word with the dealership to ask if they'd advise on what the garages excuse is and perhaps provide you with their professional assessment seen as the garage is suggesting you claim from them.

I think that it may indeed be quite a good strategy to approach the dealership in the interests of getting them to provide me with their expert assessment of the technical details. Since I have it in writing from garage #1 that I should pursue them for the costs it would hopefully place it within their best interests to help in this regards. The results of this I may then be able to use to strengthen the basis of my Letter Before Action and later legal action if necessary.

Moreover, as I said:

I have also requested the specific details of the sensor replacement from the second garage.

Will hopefully get back to me soon as well.

I'll have to go hunting again!!

Here http://www.c-suvs.com/airbags_advanc...tem-2444.html:

Thank you so much for finding that! I shall certainly be incorporating it.

I think that it makes sense to wait on the response from garage #2 and the dealership at this point (to strengthen my foundation of facts) before compiling the letter.